guys, i need your suggestions. which is more practical and useful? as an all around gear for any type of occasions.

buy these two lenses:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM SLR Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

OR

only this:

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

if you have any other options please share :)

thanks a lot! :)

EF-S 17-85 You can't upgrade to full frame body
EF 70-300 For me it's too narrow for an all around gear

ef 24-105 L would be my choice
or the 24-70 f/2.8 L that everybody's raving about.

EF-S 17-85 You can't upgrade to full frame body
EF 70-300 For me it's too narrow for an all around gear

ef 24-105 L would be my choice
or the 24-70 f/2.8 L that everybody's ranting about.

thanks for the comment Jay.. i'm thinking if the 24-105 L is really worth the price of the 2 other lenses :) right now i'm gearing towards the "L"

i'm surprised about the feedbacks of the 24-70 f/2.8 L :):)

hi allan..
given the choices..

1. the 24-105 L is a great choice if you have a full frame body (5D), not for all but for most occasions

2. the 17-85 being an EF-S would work only on a 1.6x crop camera (30d, 20d, 350d etc) and the 75-300 will be a great complement to that..covering a wide range of focal length

but if you ask me.. theres still something to be considered like what do you plan to shoot more? do you travel a lot? is it for studio? budget? etc

options?..
i use a 28-135mm IS zoom as my all around lens on my 20d and a 50mm macro for food..thats all the lenses i have..
thats how practical i could get..hehe :)

EF-S 17-85 You can't upgrade to full frame body
EF 70-300 For me it's too narrow for an all around gear

ef 24-105 L would be my choice
or the 24-70 f/2.8 L that everybody's ranting about.
why and what are they ranting about the 24-70?

guys, i need your suggestions. which is more practical and useful? as an all around gear for any type of occasions.

buy these two lenses:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM SLR Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

OR

only this:

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

if you have any other options please share :)

thanks a lot! :)

ill choose 24-105 for an all around given your choices.

please refer to the "walkaround lens" thread for more info

24-105L is the best.

why and what are they ranting about the 24-70?

i think this one..

taken from (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)

The 24-70 L focuses closer (1.25'/0.38 m vs. 1.7'/0.45 m) and yields a higher maximum magnification (.29x vs. .23x).

Price, build quality, image quality ... differences will likely not affect the purchase decision of many. Both lenses are very sharp. Both lenses have good color and contrast. The 24-105 L has less light fall-off wide open than does the 24-70 L wide open, but the 24-70 has a slight advantage at comparable apertures. The 24-105 L has slightly less CA than the 24-70 L. Both are very good in this regard only showing CA in harsh situations at their widest focal lengths.

i think this one..

taken from (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)

The 24-70 L focuses closer (1.25'/0.38 m vs. 1.7'/0.45 m) and yields a higher maximum magnification (.29x vs. .23x).

Price, build quality, image quality ... differences will likely not affect the purchase decision of many. Both lenses are very sharp. Both lenses have good color and contrast. The 24-105 L has less light fall-off wide open than does the 24-70 L wide open, but the 24-70 has a slight advantage at comparable apertures. The 24-105 L has slightly less CA than the 24-70 L. Both are very good in this regard only showing CA in harsh situations at their widest focal lengths.
Yeah..i always read reviews of lenses there.

i don't get the "rant" part..maybe he meant RAVE?

Hands down, 24-105!!!

I have two friends who bought this lens and they really love it. the picture quality is just amazing.

Oh, they bought had the 17-85 prior to buying their 24-105... one hasn't used it yet and the other one sold his.



guys, i need your suggestions. which is more practical and useful? as an all around gear for any type of occasions.

buy these two lenses:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM SLR Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

OR

only this:

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

if you have any other options please share :)

thanks a lot! :)

hi dindin,

do you have sample pics taken from your friends' 24-105 lens? if possible not post-proccesed pics :):)

thanks :)


Hands down, 24-105!!!

I have two friends who bought this lens and they really love it. the picture quality is just amazing.

Oh, they bought had the 17-85 prior to buying their 24-105... one hasn't used it yet and the other one sold his.

i use a 24-105 and im happy with it but having a 17mm is great. In my opinion the 17-85 will give you utmost flexibility. I just chose the L coz well its an L hehehe....

why not consider a 17-55 f2.8 IS instead?

i believe it is also a good option to consider especially if you have a 1.6x cropped sensor.

24-105l :) :)

Based on your choices, I say 24-105! :)

why not consider a 17-55 f2.8 IS instead?

i believe it is also a good option to consider especially if you have a 1.6x cropped sensor.

that's one heck of a lens. super sharp and fast. only drawback is that it's not "L built." it lacks the robustness of an L lens. image quality wise, i find it at par with a 24-70 L. i'd buy this if i didn't have any plans of going full frame :)

Oh I'm sorry. I meant rave :Grin: nabaliktad ko hehehehe :Grin:

why and what are they ranting about the 24-70?

Yeah..i always read reviews of lenses there.

i don't get the "rant" part..maybe he meant RAVE?

Yeah I meant rave! I'm sorry :Grin:

betwen the two i would say you cant go wrong with either the 24-70 and the 24-105. Both lenses perform really great. But i personally chose the 24-70 over the 24-105 because of the larger opening at f2.8:)

Go for the 24-105. I've been using it more on my EOS film cam. It's very sharp and has great color rendition. The only thing I hate about it is the light falloff wide open especially when you stack filters on a FF camera.

Yeah I meant rave! I'm sorry :Grin:

hihihi..nalito lang ako sir aldrich :Grin:

that's one heck of a lens. super sharp and fast. only drawback is that it's not "L built." it lacks the robustness of an L lens. image quality wise, i find it at par with a 24-70 L. i'd buy this if i didn't have any plans of going full frame :)

i still have to try one...i haven't felt it in my hands just yet..but saw some sample photos of pixel peepers and omiged...yes it is indeed sharp!:Shock:

is the image quality of the 24-105L IS comparable to the 28-138 IS? i know the prices are way too far php57t vs. 22t.. just want to know if the 24-105L IS is really worth for its price..

thanks

based on my research (internet & photo mags), 24-70 is the better performer on the whole. a magazine review said (on the 24-105), 'for the price, it should be an f/2.8...'

what your paying for with the 24-105 is the IS and the flexibility that the range gives you. The 24-70 might be a lil awkward as a walkaround lens coz its short on the tele end yet too cramped in the wide end.

as to who is the better performer i think you have to look at where youll be using the lens. if youre going to take landscapes, then i dont think the 24-70 could be considered a performer on a 1.6x crop camera. youll have better mileage with a 10-22 or even a 17-85, heck even the 18-55 can be better.

:)

is the image quality of the 24-105L IS comparable to the 28-138 IS? i know the prices are way too far php57t vs. 22t.. just want to know if the 24-105L IS is really worth for its price..

thanks
Maybe this article can help allan..:)

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/24vs28.shtml

good luck! :)

ok.. i got the 24-105L IS over the 28-135mm IS :) i don't know if i made a right decision :) since all i was thinking that investing in a "L" lens is worth it. this lens is really damn expensive!! i'm going to use this as my walk around lens :)

mario >> thanks for the link.. it seems that the picture quality is almost the same huh.. hmmm...

well allan congratulations on your new lens..post sample pics naman...:)

ok.. i got the 24-105L IS over the 28-135mm IS :) i don't know if i made a right decision :) since all i was thinking that investing in a "L" lens is worth it. this lens is really damn expensive!! i'm going to use this as my walk around lens :)

mario >> thanks for the link.. it seems that the picture quality is almost the same huh.. hmmm...

it's a d@mn good lens brader! you'll never regret it..use it wisely :)

well allan congratulations on your new lens..post sample pics naman...:)

mario and glenn >> thanks.. first try of the lens..

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/152/355768430_0ccd161892.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/124/355769160_d3cfaa6d58.jpg

hi allan..

1st pic) sharp lens indeed..
2nd pic) your WB needs tweaking..:)

keep on shooting..:)